right, but if you quote someone to support your opinion than he must have credentials
Whoa! Absolutely not!
While I admit that I will go to a person with credentials as a first order of business when studying something new, that is not the same as saying that I will dismiss someone without credentials on the same topic.
My opinions and research are based on facts and research and that is not the exclusive right, privilege, or honor or someone with "credentials".
However I would be curious to see an article or a simulation made by a qualified scientist demostrating that aliens might have visited our earth
Well, this is an interesting point. Given that we have never met aliens and that the scientific community does not acknowledge their existence, what exactly would "qualify" someone to comment on Aliens?
You get my point? There is no "Exobiology" credentials... and if they are, you really have to wonder exactly what qualifies someone to comment on alien presence on earth.
My point therefore is that on the subject of Aliens (like religion), credentials mean nothing since anyone can make as convincing (and provable!) an argument as some of the best mathematicians and physicists out there.
Just to avoid misunderstanding
Tha vast majority of scientists , as far as I know , do not beleive that aliens visited our earth for the reason explained
However many scientists beleive that aliens exist, not necessary super civilizations
Exactly. I would argue that ALL scientist have to accept that the evidence does not prove anything about Alien Visitation. That same person may have an opinion or belief on the subject, but the scientist in that person has to admit that the evidence simply is not there to make a solid statement on this subject.
